3496720132013eng27129121279articleSage Publ.London1------Accountability of immigration administration comparing crises in Norway, Denmark and GermanyAccountability can be conceptualized as institutionalized mechanisms obliging actors to explain their conduct to different forums, which can pose questions and impose sanctions. This article analyses different crises' in immigration policies in Norway, Denmark and Germany along a descriptive framework of five different accountability types: political, administrative, legal, professional and social accountability. The exchanges of information, debate and their consequences between an actor and a forum are crucial to understanding how political-administrative action is carried out in critical situations. First, accountability dynamics emphasize conventional norms and values regarding policy change and, second, formal political responsibility does not necessarily lead to political consequences such as minister resignations in cases of misbehaviour. Consequences strongly depend on how accountability dynamics take place.International review of administrative sciences : an international journal of comparative public administration10.1177/00208523134782510020-8523 (print)wos:2011-2013WOS:000320916600007Reichersdorfer, J (reprint author), Univ Potsdam, August Bebel Str 89, D-14482 Potsdam, Germany., reichers@uni-potsdam.deJohannes ReichersdorferTom ChristensenKarsten Vrangbaekenguncontrolledaccountability dynamicsenguncontrolledaccountability mechanismenguncontrolledadministrationenguncontrolledasylumenguncontrolledcivil serviceenguncontrolledimmigrationenguncontrolledminister responsibilityenguncontrolledpublic administrationSozialwissenschaftenReferiert4032620172017eng21postprint1--2017-12-14--Accountability of immigration administrationAccountability can be conceptualized as institutionalized mechanisms obliging actors to explain their conduct to different forums, which can pose questions and impose sanctions. This article analyses different crises' in immigration policies in Norway, Denmark and Germany along a descriptive framework of five different accountability types: political, administrative, legal, professional and social accountability. The exchanges of information, debate and their consequences between an actor and a forum are crucial to understanding how political-administrative action is carried out in critical situations. First, accountability dynamics emphasize conventional norms and values regarding policy change and, second, formal political responsibility does not necessarily lead to political consequences such as minister resignations in cases of misbehaviour. Consequences strongly depend on how accountability dynamics take place.comparing crises in Norway, Denmark and Germanyurn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus4-403262online registrationInternational review of administrative sciences 79 (2013) Nr. 2 , DOI:10.1177/0020852313478251Keine Nutzungslizenz vergeben - es gilt das deutsche UrheberrechtJohannes ReichersdorferTom ChristensenKarsten VrangbækPostprints der Universität Potsdam : Wirtschafts- und Sozialwissenschaftliche Reihe83enguncontrolledaccountability dynamicsenguncontrolledaccountability mechanismenguncontrolledadministrationenguncontrolledasylumenguncontrolledcivil serviceenguncontrolledimmigrationenguncontrolledminister responsibilityenguncontrolledpublic administrationRechtopen_accessSozialwissenschaftenReferiertOpen AccessSageUniversität Potsdamhttps://publishup.uni-potsdam.de/files/40326/pwsr83_online.pdf